Pradeep Kumar v. Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 24/6/2022 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
1. Pradeep Kumar
2. Devaki
3. Praveen Kumar ...
Petitioners Vs
1. The State rep. By The Inspector of Police W 29,AWPS Avadi.
2. Devi Rudra ...
Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the entire records connected with the criminal proceedings in FIR No.10 of 2020 dated 3/9/2020 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same as amicable settlement has been arrived between the parties. Page No:1/6
For Petitioner ...
Mr.T.Elumalai For Respondents ...
Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor for R.1 Mr.R.Sankarasubbu for Ms.K.Anitha for R.2.
- - - - -
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the case registered in FIR No.10 of 2020 dated 3/9/2020 on the file of the first respondent Police.
2. The case in a nutshell are as follows:- There is a dispute between the petitioners and second respondent with the marriage proposal of the first petitioner and the second respondent. Hence, the second respondent, lodged a complaint before the first respondent Police. F.I.R was registered in Crime No.10 of 2020, under Sections 498 (A), 506 (i) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s), 3 (1) (w) (i), 3 (1) (w) (ii) and 3 (2) (va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Page No:2/6
3. Heard Mr.T.Elumalai, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and Mr.R.Sankarasubbu for the second respondent.
4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that the petitioners and the second respondent had entered into a mutual settlement, and settled the disputes amicably.
5. First petitioner and second respondent were present before this Court, with their respective counsel and the first petitioner, second petitioner and second respondent had filed affidavits, dated 9, 9 and 28/6/2022, respectively.
6. On enquiry, the second respondent submitted that the dispute between the marriage proposal between the first petitioner and herself were solved. They got married on 13/6/2022 at Sri Vedhapureeshwarar Temple before the elders.
Page No:3/6
7. On a perusal of the materials available on record, it would indicate that the entire issue was purely personal in nature and it will not have impact on the Society. In fact, it will preserve the harmony between the two family.
8. While deciding whether to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or not, affidavits filed for compromise play a crucial role. In those cases where the settlement is arrived at, the High Court may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal proceedings/investigation.
9. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, as the matter has been settled between the parties and the first petitioner and second respondent got married, this Court is inclined to quash all the proceedings emanating from F.I.R.No.10 of 2020, pending on the file of the first respondent Police.
Page No:4/6
10. Accordingly, this Original Petition is allowed and F.I.R in Crime No.10 of 2020, pending on the file of the first respondent is quashed. Affidavits, dated 9, 9 and 28/6/2022 filed by the first and second petitioner and second respondent shall form part of the records. 24/6/2022 mvs.
Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes Speaking/Non-speaking order To
1. The Inspector of Police W 29,AWPS Avadi.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page No:5/6
N.SATHISH KUMAR,J mvs.
24/6/2022 Page No:6/6